Dr. Morgan Job speaks.

The followed is posted by kind permission of Dr Morgan Job

Books have been dangerous things. Ideas rue mankind. The only way forward for our janmabhoomi is this: the youth must abandon the Marxist ideas in Eric Williams' books; and the pervasive pimping of an ideas of race, culture or racial identity symbolized by Eric Williams as Black cult leader, Khafra Kambon, Suruj Rambachan, and Sat Maharaj as voices of an Indian, Hindu, or African race.

Marxist ideas informing policy should incite ridicule or laughter, but you hear them from the mouths of politicians, trade union leaders every day! Trinidad and Tobago is an anti-intellectual society that promotes people like Sat Maharaj, Gladiator, Sadro, Harvey Burris, Umbala, Khafra Kambon, Crocro, Aloes, Keith Rowley Camille Robinson-Regis and others to build careers promoting ideas: the same ideas as the Klu Klux Klan (KKK), Afrikaner Apartheid, colonial race theorists, race ideas that made Hitler famous.

The comfort of ignorance often comes packaged in books. Eric Williams' History of the People of Trinidad and Tobago gives comfort to racists in subtle ways, by reinforcing stereotypes, or rubbing out the memory of many important men who helped create the History of the People of Trinidad and Tobago merely because it served the purpose of the PNM Cult or more perversely because their skin colour marked them as undesirable.

Arise, Sir Vincent Capbearer!

"The Finance Minister has introduced a wage restraint policy, by virtue of the five percent cap being applied to wage and salary negotiations in the public sector."

BGWU's Vincent Cabrera, word-for-word, June 15th 2011

(http://www.workersunion.org.tt/where-we-stand/nwu-media/bigwusaysrejectthefivepercentcap).

Thus and then was born the five-percent capriciousness. Not before or after. Not by any other. Unless it was sinisterly hatched, having been ex-contexto plucked from the Guardian's rave review of how the Prime Minister's outfoxed the Grand Duke of Olde Talk?

"...The fact that Prime Minister Kamla Persad-Bissessar was able to broker this agreement with the PSA after one meeting is a huge feather in her cap and in the caps of her collaborators. It consolidates her reputation...as someone who is able to mediate seemingly intractable differences between and among groups with widely divergent interests..."

(http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:fcnDXumJ2vsJ:www2.guardian.co.tt/node/10613+trinidad+guardian+watson+duke+kamla+feather+in+her+cap&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&source=www.google.com)

But, to do that would be to credit the trade union leadership with more creative juices than they have displayed. So, let me resume the original angle.

Percentages, since whenever, are statistical expressions of averages -that's what the "per" in percentage means. So "five percent" can only refer to the maximum possible increase in total wages and salaries without throwing things out of whack.

Wages and salaries, since whenever, are part of yearly recurrent expenditure -it's called "recurrent" because, well, it recurs with predictable regularity. It's predictable because the die is cast before the year begins. Minimum yearly recurrent income too can be predicted fairly accurately. For instance, revenue from gas and oil may be determined by calculating what their average prices were over the previous twenty-year period.

Regardless of the situation, a wise pursekeeper must at all times be aware of how much is recurrently coming and going out of the purse. Else all hell would break loose if funds aren't there to settle commitments.

A windfall is an unexpected financial gain. Keyword: "unexpected".

No wise pursekeeper therefore looks to a future windfall in planning recurrent expenditure...or goes on a spending splurge because of a windfall. Oh, no! A wise pursekeeper salts away for the rainy day and invests a part of the windfall in activity which increases recurrent income.

The upshot is that wise pursekeeper tends to be unflappable -they keep a tight cap on things. Even their emotions. Especially when the purse they keep is not theirs but everyone's.

Back to Cabrera!

"The 2011 Budget was based on an oil price of US$65.00 per barrel and a Natural Gas price of US$2.75 per mmbtu. The oil price is presently US$111.05 per barrel and the price of Natural Gas is US$4.73 per mmbtu. This means that government’s revenue as per foreign exchange earnings from oil and gas increased by at least twenty five per cent (25%)..."

BGWU's Vincent Cabrera, word-for-word, June 15th 2011

(http://www.workersunion.org.tt/where-we-stand/nwu-media/bigwusaysrejectthefivepercentcap).

No, Vincent! It simply means there was a windfall. Therefore, cast your eyes upwards and drink deep of what I already said of "windfall"! While, the next paragraph:

"...During the period 2006 to 2011 Government’s expenditure grew from $37.7B to $48.9B. However during the period 2007 to 2010, the percentage of government’s expenditure on salaries and wages fell from 20.7% to 17.9%..."

(Ibidem)

is incongruous -the two sentences speak to different time periods.

Enough of that! To the chase!

Having previously seen how the madcap out of golden cups sometimes sip, it stands to reason someone has the envied task of being the cupbearer.

In royal circles, the one who fulfills such duty is knighted as the Royal Cupbearer.

Cupbearer!

Cabrera!

Sir Vincent Capbearer

Almost homophones, aren't they? How about "Capbearer"? Even closer, ent?

Arise, then, Sir Vincent Capbearer! On none but you is such an inglorious accolade worthy so to be accorded.

Incidentally, latest census figures reveal only about five percent of the populace possess the qualifications for the post of Royal Cupbearer.

How sweet the cement that binds?

During its yesterday's Statutory Meeting, the Tunapuna/Piarco Regional Corporation (TPRC) suspended Catherine Joefield -one of its two Aldermen- for twenty-one days.

 Catherine Joefield

The alderman had earlier ran afoul of the TPRC -by obstructing the good conduct of council meetings and business over an extended period. She is one of the two aldermen appointed on August 5th 2010 by the elected members of the Council, in keeping with the Regional Corporation Act.
The elected TPRC members are:
Khadijah Ameen (Chairman), Rosanna Sookdeo (Vice-Chairman), Andrew Mooteram, Brian Joseph, Colin Rodney, Erwin Hope, Esmond Forde, Graham Butcher, Dianne "Smally" Bishop-Bajnath, J-Lynn Roopnarine,  Khublal Paltoo, Ria Boodoo, Sookdeo Bharath, Steven Sam and Winston Ramsaroop. The other alderman is Jamieson Bahadur.
In the normal run of things, the TPRC's action would not have raised an eyebrow, however, as the vote was taken, Council members, TPRC staffers and visitors in the public gallery were stunned when two People's Partnership Councillors -Erwin Hope and Ria Boodoo- thumbed their noses at their own colleagues by siding with the two Peoples National Movement (PNM) members present -Steven Sam and Colin Rodney- to oppose the suspension.

 

Erwin Hope

 

Ria Boodoo

Maybe they did not understand it, but, by doing their own thing, the Hope-Boodoo connection signalled their support for wajang behaviour in the conduct of the public business, as, in essence, that is why the motion to suspend was brought. Even the two PNMites ought to have supported the motion, as, since March 2011, during the runup to the PNM's internal elections, their own leader had made it clear under his watch wajang behaviour would not be tolerated. (Never mind he himself is allegedly a wajang).
It's left to be seen what censure will be visited upon the mavericky pair by the People's Partnership, since, in matters of this sort, some clear directive is usually given to Council members by their parties prior to the vote.
But, then again, maybe the cement which binds the two mavericks is so well-applied, no threat of censure would faze them in the least?

ADDENDUM (2011, July 30th 0723hrs):

>>The Municipal Corporation Act of Trinidad and Tobago<<.

Like they want to kill The Golden Goose, or war?

Given the blusterous response of what passes for trade union leaders in this country to yesterday's uncapping-the-5% meeting, it's clear they're not clear of how or with whom properly to negotiate, but very clear on how to muddle when clarity is needed.
All that to say every single one of them are rhetorical radicals who would never really put their life, limb, or personal worth on the line to advance this country.
I challenge any of them to debate me on this topic and, if I lose, I shall join in strenuously -but, civilly- arguing their "Please, Kamla! Uncap!" cause.
Speaking of their personal worth, it is time to bring the wealth of trade unionists under public scrutiny, for I can't understand why it is alleged how so many of them live -even in retirement- in such opulence, while bawling from the rooftops that their members ketching dey nenen.
As to the Golden Goose, doh get tie-up! For, despite her trooping colours, she's no chicken.

 

 Jai, Trinbago!

Invoking Ian's Idiom.

It is alleged that an elected representative was once asked, "Why do you keep making decisions concerning your constituents without consulting with them?"
The elected representative replied, "Because people don't really know how to make the best choices where their own interest is concerned!"
The elected representative haughtiness was cut short by the rebuttal, "That makes you living proof of what you allege."

For those who came in late...

...or who reached long time but have forgotten:

• Politics is in everything! And,
• "politics" is a civilized way of conducting war, plain and simple!

The corollaries would be:

• We can't escape political impact! And,
• if we want to prevail, we cannot remain silent or witless -we have to engage in a constructive manner!

However, every act of construction involves destruction -consider the simple building block, how it's made and knocked this way and that, sometimes split asunder to make a perfect fit.

So it has been from time immemorial! So shall it be till the cows eventually stop coming home!

QUOD ERAT DEMONSTRANDUM ADERAM

Was he speaking of sex?

Re: http://www2.guardian.co.tt/news/2011/07/18/indo-trinidadians-take-stock

To report on a conference held the previous Saturday, the Trinidad Guardian of Monday July 18, 2011 preambled by excerpting this comment from the speech delivered by Swami Prakashananda:

"Indians have to live with the fact that others do things differently from them...."

I thought the Swami was speaking of sex, but quickly disabused my mind on realizing the conference was themed:

Indians, You Have Arrived: Where Do You Go From Here?

In isolation, one would spin that any which way. In context, the guru was speaking of the role of Indo-Trinbagonians in the development of their communities and the wider world:

“We have moved up the socio-political and economic ladder...But these are all outer movements. “Have we moved inward to embody the Indian ethos—dharma and its elements? “It is only this movement that can help us make any meaningful contribution to the development of T&T.”
Prakashananda said development was not a selfish process:

“We have to develop the whole. In other words, we cannot think of developing ourselves without thinking of others or the environment.”

Prima facie, introspection is good, for, like mortification of the body, it is good catharsis for the soul. However, in a country such as ours, where few can claim ethnic, emotional or spiritual purity (and even those few must concede we all sprung from one common ancestry, thus all of us are inextricably biologically-related), the continued focus by any part on on its intrinsic qualities will do more to keep us apart than weld us into one (the Guardian ensconced its reportage under the rubric "Indo-Trinidadians take stock".

In my view, until we understand that we are firstly, secondly, thirdly and throughout Trinbagonians and that Trinbago is a callalloo, we won't begin the task of making these islands the paradise they were intended and gifted to be, which is the only reason why, for purposes none present controlled, we were assembled here by whatever means.
In future, then, such discourses must be open to the whole.

All the same, Jai Trinbago!

GO AHEAD! ONE DAY THE CHEESE WILL STAND ALONE!

Dispassionately discerning from faraway and, as one organized to think no neat public policy originates or permanently prospers but by intelligent input obtained of the beneficiaries, my mind has set on assessing ongoing agitation in our labour sector as inevitably emanating from serious errors committed by both sides which inhibit the attaining of accord; thus, peace cannot be restored till protagonists implement tempering factors, such as the five I trotted out in mirrored order below.

Firstly, since public-sector trade unions represent the men and women upon whom Government depends to execute its vision,

1. Government must view those unions as its colleagues, not enemies, consequently treat them as important stakeholders in everything it contemplates or does and,

2. Unions must view the good health and prosperity of The Public Purse as their primary concerns (“No money, no love!” Not so, Sparrow?), hence must exhort their members to give a full day’s work for a full day’s pay.

Secondly, unbridled access to and exchange of correct and relevant information promotes understanding and reduces hostility. Therefore,

1. Government has a solemn duty to put all the material facts on the table when negotiating with the unions and,

2. Unions have a duty to analyze and present those facts to their members in a wholesome, not bullying, fashion.

Thirdly, because capricious decision-making and action involving industrial practices are banned by our laws and precedents,

1. Government must put its best offer on the table from the outset to avoid protracted (consequently morale-depleting) negotiations and,

2. Unions must avoid giving the impression the door to continued negotiation is closed when it’s still wide open.

Fourthly, where mutual trust and respect is lacking, innovation to instil such becomes a necessity. Therefore,

1. Government must involve the public-sector unions in the very process of deciding what it can offer them and,

2. Unions must open the remuneration packages of their officials and negotiators to ongoing public scrutiny.

Finally, hotheadedness escalates negativity and invariably results in the cheese standing alone. So,

1. Government must never employ short-fused individuals to negotiate on its behalf and,

2. Union negotiators must avoid playing to the gallery.

Such are some of the considerations which would help morph the entire public sector into a vivacious and flexible machine, which are the attributes it needs to acquire if ever the government is to deliver to the people, deliver to the people, deliver to the people!

I gone!